On Tue, 2004-03-02 at 01:37, A. Pagaltzis wrote: > As a stopgap solution f.ex to test the stability of your offering > that's ok. But since it can be written to be a drop-in > replacement it'd be preferrable for apps not have to include > system specific code; rather, IO::Poll should be able to use the > epoll(4) interface where available so all apps automatically > benefit. I'm sure Graham will gladly take a patch. :)
A reasonable point. It would certainly be nice for IO::Poll to use epoll when available. On the other hand, since IO::Poll is distributed only as part of the main Perl distribution, that would involve contributing a patch to perl5-porters. Which is certainly worthwhile, but of course users would have to upgrade their Perl to take advantage. Also, there are instances where access to the lower level epoll interface may be preferred. It doesn't make sense to put that in IO::Poll. So I think there may still be use for IO::Epoll on CPAN, even if it's mostly supplanted by IO:Poll. I think I'll proceed with uploading IO::Epoll, that way it's available for those who need it with their current perl, or who need the low-level functions.
